Friday, 16 May 2014

Yohji Yamamoto

Yohji Yamamoto was born in Tokyo in 1943. He graduated for Keio University with a Law Degree in 1966 but went on to learn tailoring under  who is considered to be a master tailor and is known for his avant-garde tailoring feature Japanese design architects. His more prestigious awards for his contributions to fashion include Commandeur of Ordre des Arts et des Lettres, Medal of Honor with Purple Ribbon, the Ordre national du Mérite, the Royal Designer for Industry and the Master of Design award by Fashion Group International.

"'I think that my men's clothes look as good on women as my women's clothing […] When I started designing, I wanted to make men's clothes for women." More recently he has expounded: “When I started making clothes for my line Y’s in 1977, all I wanted was for women to wear men’s clothes. I jumped on the idea of designing coats for women. It meant something to me – the idea of a coat guarding and hiding a woman’s body. I wanted to protect the woman’s body from something – maybe from men’s eyes or a cold wind.”


His work focusses on genderless forms, which enable both men and women to wear his clothing. I love that his work is almost always monochromatic. The tailoring is beautiful and the layering and drapery is so attractive. He is the most influential designer in my life. His work has influenced my illustration and my dress sense at times. I will never not be fond of him, he's adorable and massively skilled.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yohji_Yamamoto
Privilege

I work in a fast food restaurant and everyday food is being thrown at that could otherwise be given to those in need. I never ever understood until I brought it up to my manager and he went on to explain that we aren't allowed to give  perfectly good food to homeless people because they could sue the company. Fair enough, but there are services which allow the food to safely be transported to homeless shelters, school clubs etc. and I am going to be bringing it up again because I want change.

I think it should be a legal requirement that restaurants have the facilities to enable them to drop off food to various places that would benefit from the donations. I read an article on the independent which claims that 'Britain's restaurants throw away more than 600,000 tonnes of food a year' and I think it's so disgusting that there are people dying for food and food is jut being tossed away. 

The problem is privilege. People who are doing alright in life forget about those that aren't and tend to not give a shit. I've done it myself, I've wasted food before and each time my mum would get so mad at me for the same reason I am mad now. It's all well me talking about my privilege, many people talk about it but it's not about talking, it's about doing. I still pass homeless people and a voice in my head screams at me "Skye help out, ask thm it they want something" and I get so shy tht I end up letting the opportunity pass. It pisses me off. And I get so angry that people don't care to do things for others. They wait until they're put in a vulnerable position before they *maybe* decide to help others. We'll all be dead one day and the least we can do is respect and help eachother. 

Susie Mesure, (2010), UK Restaurants Waste 600,000 Tonnes of Food a Year

Double standards

It's always dumbfounded me how men are allowed to sleep with however many women and be praised and congratulated on it, whereas girls do the same and are made to feel less of a person. 

I did some reading which basically spoke about how girls are attracted to guys who are liked by other girls (preselection). Women feel they can change their guy who's had history into heing a man who's only exclusive to her. Guys are ready to accept their guy friends as being players because they seem to have game and aspire to be in tht position, whereas a girl bein loose is seen as vulnerable and being taken for granted. The madonna-white complex days that guys want girls to be madonnas to other guys and whores just for them, probably because it would hurt their ego to see their girl attract other guys. 

Women should have the sexual freedom that men have and nobody should be shamed for enjoying something natural. Same goes for people in monogamous relationships, as long as each participant has given consent and there's mutual respect, I say let people do what they want. 

Athlone McGinnis, (2013), Why There Will Always Be A Sexual Double Standard
http://www.returnofkings.com/17646/why-there-will-always-be-a-sexual-double-standard

Get out of my Country

A friend of mine who is half Australian and now lives there came down for the summer and I remember he made a comment about Australia Day and made jokes about the Aboriginies wanting to celebrate, as if they weren't allowed to. I was mad at myself for not pointing out that it was their land first, and not anybody else's, so they had the most right to celebrate their land but I just couldn't believe the cheek of it. 

It made me think of America and how back in the day there was segregation and you still have people talking about "go back to Africa/Asia" or whatever foreign country they wanna spew hatred towards. It's like, the country was taken by your ancestors. People were raped, murdered and wiped out. The original descendants are the only ones who have that kind of right to say "leave". 

We have the similar problem here in the UK. There's the BNP who want to send foreigners back to where they came from and I've heard an old man ramble on about immigrants and how they should get out, but, it were the British who were taking people from foreign lands and making them slaves. What about when these same people want to travel? You want Africans out of your country but you'll happily go on a safari. You'll say that you want Indians out, but you'll snap away at the Taj Mahal. Furthermore, this land was built on immigrants and still is. 

People are just so ignorant and there rally is no other word for it. They claim patriarchy and are so protective of their kind but have no idea about the history of their land. 

When land is stolen it is not rightfully yours, so I don't believe you have a right to tell anyone else to leave. Especially those brought over by your ancestors. 
predominantly, they have a right to celebrate. 

Education is so important. I find that some of the most ignorant people are the same ones who have access to education. I do think that history needs to be taught on matters like colonisation, to reveal the reality of why the world is the way it is and how it got there. 

What is it with some guys?

Every day when I get ready, I consciously dress for myself. I don't dress for Peter, I don't dress for Jane, I dress for myself. I'm in a relationship now, but even when I was single, I never thought "I'll have my legs on show to impress the men I pass" or "I'll wear this vest top to the club because guys will find me sexy". 

Now I know some women think that way, but my point is, why do some men feel as though women dress for them and exist only to please them? And furthermore, why does the way a woman dress give you any kind of right to touch or catcall her? It's unacceptable and I don't feel as though the way a woman dresses makes them a target. I've been out in a hoodie and unflattering jeans and have still be harassed. It's as if, everything a woman does must revolve around a man. 

There are numerous articles online giving tips in how to be more sexy for men and how to flirt with them. Wikihow has some tips for looking "sexy" for a guy. These instructions incline being "clean" and wear "matching, clean clothes that fit" amongst other basic things. What I don't get it, if you don't do these things already for yourself, why are you doing it for a man?

I've heard and seen women and men talk about how "men hate tattoos" and "always act like a lady". For what reason? If a guy doesn't like me for me, he won't get far with me. I think woman should start doing what they want. Men want "natural women", no makeup, no implants, natural hair, yet, they idolise celebrities like Rihanna, Nicki Minaj and Kim Kardashian who all have "unnatural" elements to their person.


Those Who Have Everything

In life we are told, that if we live a glamorous lifestyle and have a lot of money, we will be happy. So it's easy to associate mental illnesses such as depression, with people who are struggling or going through hardship. What about those who have everything though? How could they possibly go through any kind of hardship if they have money, and live a lifestyle that many crave but will never see?, it doesn't make sense. These were the thoughts that were floating around my mind when I was 15 years old and discovered that one of my favourite models, Daul Kim, had hung herself.


http://blogue.us/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/Picture-195-583x423.png

Daul Kim was a South Korean fashion model, painter and blogger who had walked down catwalks at Paris Fashion Week, graced covers of  magazines such as Vogue and walked for notable designers including Vivienne Westwood, Chanel and Alexander McQueen. She was named 'Model of the Year' by Anan magazine in 2008 and even sparked controversy in Korea for posing nude in i-D magazine. As her career developed, she moved to Paris.

The kind of lifestyle she lead, from an outsider's perspective, seems perfect. An elite lifestyle, an image of perfection who could afford anything - that's a happy life, right? It's not until you take a closer look at her blog posts and her paintings, that you see the cracks. She talks about loneliness and depression, and said "i relate to nothing... i just know/the more i gain/the more lonely it is". Her last post in November was titled 'say hi to forever'. It was a tendency to title her posts with 'say hi to' and the 'forever' foreshadowed what her built up feelings would result in. She was only 20, and being 19 going on 20 myself it's just strange to put myself in that situation. However, being older and having gone through a low phase myself, I have more of an understanding of depression. It knows no bounds and it doesn't matter what kind of lifestyle you have, nobody is invisible. I remember feeling so awful and getting mad at myself because "there are people dying out there, what have you got to cry about?". It's a mental illness and I think the sooner people start to understand that, the easier it will get to stop blaming and questioning people who are suffering, and start helping them appropriately.


Daul Kim, (2007-2009), 'I LIKE TO FORK MYSELF',
http://iliketoforkmyself.blogspot.co.uk


Banksy

Banksy is the pseudonym for the UK based graffiti artist, political activist, painter and film director. I'm not going to lie I've always avoided researching Banksy because I just found him a bit of a typical artist to talk about but here I am.

 
His satirical streetrat combined dark humour with graffiti, which is executed in his distinctive stencilling technique. His work provides political commentary and is displayed on walls, bridges and buildings across the World. Banksy's work was made up of the Bristol underground scene which was made up of collaborations between artists and musicians. It is noted that his style is similar to Blek le Rat, a Parisian artist who worked with stencils in 1981. Banksy stated that he was inspired by a "3D" graffiti artist, who later became the leading founder of 'Massive Attack'. Banksy is well known for his contempt against the government for labelling graffiti as vandalism, which is why he displays his artwork so freely on buildings etc. None of his pieces are for sale, but art auctioneers try to sell his work on spot and the highest bidder has the responsibility of removing the artwork. Banksy's first film, 'Exit through the gift shop' was billed as "the world's first street art disaster movie" made it's debut in the 2010 Sundance a Film Festival, and was nominated for the Academy Award for Best Documentary in 2011.


Like I mentioned in my Authorship post, people are drawn to mystery, and I feel like Banksy is some kind of superhero. You see a regular guy, but when nobody's around he's Banksy, the political commentator. Although I haven't ever shown much interest in him, he seems like a pretty cool guy and I am fond of quite a few of his works and what they say about the world we live in. They are thought-provoking and great topics for discussion.

Graham Rawle

Graham Rawle is a UK writer and collage artist who incorporates illustration, design, photography and installation in his work. He had a series called 'Lost Consonants' which ran in the weekly guardian for 15 years. Lost Consonants were illustrations with a consonant missing from the sentence, altering the meaning. 


This kind of wit and humour never ceases to amaze me. It's so clever, I can't imagine how he managed to do one every week for 15 years - that's dedication. 

He's made other series, the most recent being a weekly one called 'Bright Ideas' for the 'The Times' which ran from 2009-2010.

His reinterpretation of 'The Wizard of Oz' is probably my favorite work of his. It won the 2009 Book of the Year and best Illustrated Trade Book at the British Biok Design Awards As if the story isn't weird enough, Rawle's collages are super strange. He made every character and set which again showcases his dedication to his work. I watched the trailer for the book itself and it's style resembles that of what I would probably relate to the 70s (only because the Lion looks like a stuffed you my mum had growing up as a child in the 70s) and it's a really innovative way of working. 


I think, going through a lengthy process of making a set and characters etc, in order to photograph it and put it into a book is admirable. It takes a lot of hard work and patience, sonething  which I think I need to work on personally. Going through different processes in order to have an outstanding outcome is obviously worth the time. 

Olly Moss

Olly Moss in a British Graphic designer and Illustrator working in Winchester UK.

He studied Literature at the University of Birmingham and graduates in 2008 and in 2013 founded a video game studio along with several others called 'Campo Santo'.

His reimagining of movie posters is what has gained him popularity and Marvek commissioned him to design the last poster for 'Thor' and his other works include cover artwork for the 'Resistance 3' video game, which then went on to have a trailer for the game in the same style. His simplistic style is what drew me to write about him. 


His "image within image" style as I like to call it, is a really intelligent way of communicating what the poster is about without the page being too full and confusing. I love layering and I think Moss does this well, for example the trees and house in the foreground with trees in the background, all encased in a hand. There's a great sense of action, of course, without movement. 


I'm a huge fan of Studio Ghibli films and Moss' redesigns of the movie posters are so beautiful. This poster for 'Spirited Away' manages to incorporate more detail than what I've usually seen from Moss, but it still keeps his signature aestetic. A static form in the centre of the page which draws you in, and his brilliant use of shadow and light creates depth. This poster invites us to a more mature vision of the film, even a slightly sinister vision. 

I think from viewing Moss' work I will think more about the use of space in my own work. How can I get all the information down without it spreading across to every corner of the page? It's really exciting to think about, and I want to become an illustrator so it's something worth experimenting with. 



Thursday, 15 May 2014

Identity

Authorship

I read an interesting debate about whether Shakespeare of Stratford actually wrote his plays or not.
Anti-Stratfordians believe that Shakespeare was used as a facade to shield the actual author/authors from being revealed for whatever reason. Some people believed that his upbringing didn't match up to his "greatest author of all time" status. Basically, because he was a Stratford boy without aristocratic heritage, he wasn't capable of producing the kind of work he produced. It's typical ignorance. Even though the topic sparked interest and controversy, most Shakespeare Scholars believe it to be hearsay.

I just found it interesting because it made me think about how, in life, we often take things as they are. Of course there are things we are skeptical about, but for example, my favourite musicians are Red Hot Chili Peppers. Now, I believe that all of their songs are written by them, as I know about the meanings behind a lot of the songs and they are often about personal experiences of the band members, particularly Kiedis. However, do I really know that they wrote their own songs? I would be gutted if I found out they weren't, but I trust enough to believe that it is. I could easily say, like these theorists who disbelieve Shakespeare to be the author of his own works, that Kiedis grew up in a drug-filled environment so how on Earth did he manage to become successful? Of course times have changed and obviously everyday people are more recognised for their talents, it just sounds ridiculous to even think. I actually don't know if I'm making sense but I do believe - as a side note - that people who have nothing, or don't have everything, tend to fight more and work harder than those who are handed everything and a person's ability isn't limited to their upbringing or their environment.

 http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/31/William_Shakespeare_1609.jpg


http://images4.fanpop.com/image/photos/15000000/Anthony-Kiedis-anthony-kiedis-15021649-1046-1680.jpg

Back to Shakespeare, I think the whole facade belief to be interesting. At first I thought, why would a creator not want to be associate with their work? Especially if it has gained a large amount of popularity? But then, look at Gorillaz and Daft Punk, both hide their identity and are still massively popular. Until I did a Google search of those behind the cartoons and helmets, I could have walked right past them and not known who they were. I think it's the mystery which draws people in, which is probably why there is a debate over Shakespeare. People love Gossip, and to talk about all of the possibilities of who really wrote 'Romeo & Juliet' would definitely spark excitement if it was slapped across a London newspaper. People are excited by the unknown and will believe any sort of rubbish in order to feed that excitement.

http://www.gq.com/images/style/2013/05/daft-punk/daft-punk-630.jpg 

http://images.fanpop.com/images/image_uploads/gorillaz-gorillaz-338179_1920_1320.jpg
Hopefully you understood what I meant...


Gender

Not long ago I watched a documentary called 'Secrets of the living Dolls' on Channel 4. It follows the lives of men who dress themselves to look like dolls.

http://cdn.24.co.za/files/Cms/General/d/2635/102f9541fde0433abe6a98f16477b8ac.jpg

These men wear skins made by the Ramos family who make them exclusively and sell them Worldwide. The skins are customisable and can include a vagina, boobs, you name it. The men who dress as these human dolls live regular lives, most of them had female spouses and children.

What was interesting was the feeling of freedom some of the men felt from wearing these skins. One man in particular saw it as a form of "escapism". Another guy felt as though he would never get a girlfriend when he was younger, so he wanted to create what he never had. Some feel confident as these dolls, they feel beautiful and gain attention, whereas they don't feel so when they are their regular selves.

The different reasons for wearing these skins made me think. I think many would just assume that a man dressing as a woman isn't that deep, he just likes women's clothing or he feels better as a woman, but it goes a lot deeper than that. You never really know why people do what they do.

It was fascinating. As you grow older you are exposed to more adult themes, and lately I've seen a lot of things relating to gender and I find it really interesting as well as saddening. Personally I feel no way about whether a man wants to dress as a woman or if a woman wants to dress as a man etc. I think everybody has the right to do what makes them happy as long as it's not hurting other people or themselves. The level of ignorance which exists is really sad, and that goes for ignorance against homosexuality, trans people, race, culture etc. If it doesn't have a negative affect on you, why does it matter? Why can't it be accepted? Double standards need to be wiped out. A girl can wear jeans, why can't a man wear a skirt? It's 2014 it shouldn't be a big deal, there's so many horrible things going on in the World and people would rather hate than love. It's sad. Anyway rant over.

I really respect the courage that these people have and life is better with variety so I applaud this lifestyle.

Race

Everyday, you are surrounded by some kind of controversy surrounding race. There are so many things I could talk about, most of them not being personal, but still affecting me. I'm mixed race, and fortunately I have never come across racism from either side. I've never felt rejected by a group of black people or a group of white people, which isn't surprising I've grown up in London which is very diverse. I don't have the patience for racism and I won't be polite to a racist. Being mixed race seemed like a "gift" growing as a teen. Mixed kids were always praised. Honestly I don't see the hype, but one thing that has bothered me in recent months, is the Black on Black hatred I've noticed, predominantly on social media.

"Lightskin" vs "Darkskin".  It's getting to a point where people are finding it an acceptable kind of recreation for black people to just compare the skin shades of other black people. I see it mostly in my generation though I don't doubt it exists elsewhere. I can't even count many black guys have told me I'm a pretty "lightskinned" chick, as if, I would be unattractive if I were darker than midnight. They talk about "black women" as if they are all loud, all ignorant, all quick to argue and cause problems. I've heard Black guys say "I'm marrying a *insert a non-black* woman because I don't want my kids to have "bad hair" or "dark skin" like, you came from a black woman you ignorant arse. They project self-hate without even realising it. It really bothers me because it's just a stereotype, and if we all believed stereotypes then we'd all be ignorant and we'd get nowhere. It's also funny because it's usually always black guys complaining about black women, and when they do it in front of me I sit there and think... you do realise you are talking to a black girl? I may not be fully black, but it's a part of me, and if black women are so unattractive and unbearable, how do you see me as different? It upsets me so much because black people have a horrific past that's been overcome to a great extent, and to hate on your own kind, it makes no sense to me. Racism in general is disgusting, but its like women who hate other women but love men... don't you want to unite with your own (as well as accept and love others)? What is wrong with black? Why are adults with understanding being brainwashed into believing that light skin is the only way to be beautiful? It's everywhere. Again, it's 2014 and rather than educating themselves and bettering themselves, people are talking out of their backside about illogical nonsense. 

I do think it is a deep-rooted issue. We grow up seeing paler complexions as beautiful. It doesn't matter where you go. I remember I hated my curly hair at one point when I attended a predominantly white sixth form, because I felt it like I would never look as sexy as the girls with straight hair or beach waves and I just looked out of place at times. It isn't just black people who try to conform to society's idea of perfection, and it extends beyond race too. It's just sad that I'm not shocked that black people are at war with each other over who's light and who's dark. These behaviours are inherited and absorbed.

http://distilleryimage0.s3.amazonaws.com/fc8c6338efa211e2b4d922000a1fae83_7.jpg



Sexuality

I watched a video on youtube about sexuality in America and how it became a topic of interest from the 1950s up to the 1990s.

During the 50s the video gives a clear idea that sex was just not spoken about in America. There were laws against sexual related content, e.g. abortions were illegal and parents were careful in their efforts to sway their teens from sexual intercourse. Pregnancy was a huge scare and of course, there was no access to contraception or abortions, so pregnancy was dangerous for those who didn't want a child. What's strange is that, everything but sex was allowed. "Heavy petting" is what they described as foreplay I suppose, but I think, if sex was frowned upon so much, and seen as "sinful" why let all of that foreplay happen? It's all or nothing, you know? It was so extreme that it's almost laughable. Then Hugh Hefner creates 'Playboy' magazine, originally a lifestyle magazine where nudity and sex is seen as beautiful. Sending nudes via mail became part of the revolution and a cultural war erupted between the Christians and the Hugh Hefners, you could say. The congressmen were so over-the-top, making sex sound like a death sentence, it's so funny. When 'Rock n Roll' came about, parents hated it because it was sex-fuelled, and the music crossed racial boundaries which caused even more trouble. The white kids started to "emulate" black styles of dance, and it became a big deal.
During the 60's the first oral contraceptive was produced and American views of sex completely changed. These pills had high levels of oestrogen and pro-oestrogen which was dangerous but over time developments were made. Helen Gurley Brown spoke out loud about how to enhance sexuality for women, making it non-exclusive to men. The young generation started to open up about sex and weren't afraid to express their sexuality. Bars began opening showcasing topless dancers and supporters  such as the 'Sexual Freedom League' would attend. Woodstock attendees expressed free love, forcing people to "define" what it meant for them and that sexuality was about the spirit and the mind as well as the body. The revolution meant that you could "get laid" whenever, and sexuality was freedom.

The documentary was intriguing, from a modern viewpoint it's so cool to see how things have changed and become socially acceptable to a certain extent. There's even a part during the video where University students held unions, where they insisted on having the right to political thoughts on campus. There was a 'filthy speech' movement and students were arrested for saying the 'F' word. It's funny to think of now because the word is thrown about everywhere, but it was such an important change back then. I wonder if things will ever revert back to being crude.




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=48pGaYfDTYY
http://www.channel4.com/programmes/secrets-of-the-living-dolls/4od

Modernism and Post-Modernism

Modernism

Modernism came from the wide-spread and large-scale changes to Western society in the 19th and 20th centuries. It was a revolt against the conservative values of realism. Modernism set out to progress from, recreate and improve on traditional forms of culture such as art, literature, religion, architecture, daily life and political conditions of a newly developed industrial world. The traditional forms were seen as outdated and modernism saw them now as obsolete. Religion was disregarded and enlightenment thinking was rejected. Self consciousness was a vital part of modernism. With consciousness, people were able to experiment and draw attention to the process and materials used  - and to the further tendency of abstraction.

Before the term modernism was appointed, the term "avant garde" was used to label the arts. Surrealism became popular art form and was considered an extremist form of modernism.

Salvador Dali is an example of surrealist modernism.


Modernist architecture followed a "form follows function" theme meaning a building would be designed in the shape to suit its function. Simplicity and clarity was followed as any ornamental detail was deemed "uncecessary". Materials were set 90 degrees to each other and the physical structure of the building was to be displayed. The 'Truth of Materials' concept was also present, which meant that the true nature of a material was to be shown and not altered in any way to become different. Buildings were to be made of industrially-produced materials, as a way of adopting the machine aesthetic. Emphasis of horizontal and vertical lines was present in International Style Modernism.

An example of modernist architecture was the Crystal Palace which existed not too far from where I live. It was a modernist building because the structure of the building itself was clearly visible.


Postmodernism 

Postmodernism is movement away from the modernism viewpoint. It includes skeptical viewpoints of culture, literature, philosophy, economics and literary criticism. It's often associated with deconstruction and post structuralism as it gained popularity at the same time as post structuralist thought.
The term has been applied to movements mainly in art, literature and music which react against the tendencies present in modernism and are typically marked by the revival of historical elements and ways of working. It reacts against the assumed certainty of scientific and objective efforts to explain reality and says that reality is personal and relative, it's more than just the human understanding of reality. For this reason, post modernism is skeptical of supposed valid explanations for all groups, traditions, races etc.

Postmodern art tends to be associated with installation art, conceptual art, intermedia and multimedia. To be considered postmodern art, there are several characteristics which must be included: bricolage, the use of words prominently as the central artistic element, collage, simplification, appropriationperformance art, the recycling of past styles and themes in a modern-day context, as well as the break-up of the barrier between fine and high arts and low art and popular culture.

Duchamp is an example of a postmodern artist, whose work was a pre curser to conceptual art.


Postmodernist architecture began as an international style which was first cited as developing in the late 1950s but not becoming a movement until the 1970s. It continues to influence modern architecture. The functional and formal styles of modernist architecture was replaced with more diverse aestetic styles: styles collide, form is adopted for it's own sake and new ways of viewing familiar styles and space were discovered in large. There was a rediscovery of elements of traditional architecture which had been abandoned in modernism.

An early example is Michael graves' Portland building in Portland Oregon.


Personally I feel as though postmodernism illustrates a more realistic view of the World, with diversity and freedom to cross boundaries, a slight dystopia. Modernism tried to believe in a World full of good, a utopia, where everything is unrealistically perfect and tidy. Modernism is black and white, postmodernism is black, white and everything in between.

https://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110425112032AAD90qq

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_art

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postmodern_art

See deconstruction
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deconstruction

See post structuralism
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-structuralism


Semiotics

In the beginning, semiotics was an investigation of linguistics. It then developed to examining anthropology and psychology, then into an enquiry of sociology and philosophy, then cultural products such as art, films, literature and finally a method for researching and analysing costumer behaviour and brand communications.

Semiotics investigate how signs and symbols create meaning and how these meanings are communicated. It allows us to see how the world around us impacts us subconsciously. For example, when we see a heart shape, we tend to associate it with love. When we see a red sign, we often associate it with danger or "STOP". For us to identify the meaning of these signs we must understand the context surrounding it.

Concepts:

Signs

Signifiers: The physical form of a sign, sound, word or image which is being communicated.


Signified: Thoughts or meanings which are expressed by a sign which we interpret via connotations.




Denotation and Connotation

Denotation: The physical object which provides a form of communication.

Connotation: Connotation is vital in our understanding of things. Connotations are built on experiences, ideologies and expectations, which means that different people will react differently to the same thing. For example, one person may see an image of the sea and find it beautiful, whereas another may see the same image and become fearful.

Icon: An icon physically resembles the signifier. A popular example are the trendy moustache icons going around nowadays. Seeing another form of moustache is still recognisable because it has the same physical qualities.



Symbol: A symbol is opposite to an icon. it doesn't physically resemble what it is representing. Signs are learnt culturally, which is why different cultures develop different symbols. An example is the Male and Female toilets symbols. They represent toilets, but do not physically resemble a toilet in any way. Symbols take on an extra meaning.


Index: An index describes the physical connection between signifier and signified. This means that a signifier cannot exist without the signified. An example is that smoke can't exist without fire. The smoke is the signifier and the fire is the signified.



In summary, a denotative signifier is the physical object which we see and they provide meanings. The signified is the connotation of the signifier. This changes depending on experiences, ideologies and culture.